View Full Version : Goals need gems?

12-25-11, 03:13 PM
I'm trying to complete some of the goals in PSS, but a lot of them seem to require gems! :mad::mad: Is this the new TL trend to require you to purchase gems? Why would it require me to buy a fishtank to complete a goal? Or better yet, to buy a Maltese with gems to complete a goal?? Am I the only one steamed about this?:mad:

12-25-11, 03:14 PM
I'm not happy about it, but I'm not mad. I just won't complete those goals.

12-25-11, 05:15 PM
I won't either. I just think its pretty ridiculous.

12-25-11, 07:14 PM
I'm not doing any of the goals that require gems, unless it's to breed an animal that I wanted anyway. For example in Zoo there was a goal to breed a Liger, and you would get three gems. Breeding the Liger cost seven gems. I figured for the price of four gems (7 minus the 3 you get back), it was a decent deal, especially since I was just using gems I won through quests anyway. There are a few gem animals in Pets that are worth spending your freebie gems on, because you can use them to breed other animals for coins and to complete goals. For example the Bengal will let you get the Toyger and the Toyger in turn is part of another quest. But, again, we're talking about small amounts, not sending TeamLava a day's paycheck.

Some of the goals are just obnoxiously ridiculous though! Completing a family of animals that would cost you over $100?! How can sending TeamLava over $100 be called a quest? There's another one where you have to breed an animal that costs something like 50-60 gems (I think it was 53, but I'm not sure), and if you fork over that money you find out you must buy a SECOND of the same animal to complete the goal. That is just obnoxious.

Overall I do appreciate the quests. They have allowed me to earn some gems and get a few extra animals. I just get very annoyed at quests that are basically nothing more than "Send us your money!" It makes me resentful.